It is widely acknowledged that relations between the West and Russia have never been as bad as they are since the end of the Cold War. The reason, of course, is Ukraine, but beyond it lie the implied conflicting interests of the two sides.
Simply put, the West, led by the United States, is trying to deny Russia anything but the status of a marginal middle-ranking power after the break up of the Soviet Union. Ukraine has assumed great importance because its future would decide the outcome of the Western objective.
For President Vladimir Putin’s Russia, Ukraine is its inseparable hinterland tied to it by religion, language and close familial ties. Moscow has watched helplessly as such areas as the Baltic states were not merely separated from the old Soviet Union but were absorbed by the anti-Communist and anti-Russian North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. The Putin presidency felt it was time to act.
In President Putin’s eyes, the chasing away of one Ukrainian President in favour of a contrived new pro-Western order signified an unacceptable proposition. Everyone knows that Ukraine is a divided nation between a western, largely Ukrainian-speaking, and an eastern section, preponderantly Russian-speaking with close religious and familial ties with Russia.
Before sanctions and tit-for-tat counter-sanctions took over, President Putin has suggested a compromise even while accepting the election of the pro-Western Petro Poroshenko. It was to give generous autonomous powers to the eastern region in a loose federation, while ensuring that Ukraine is not absorbed into Nato.
Kiev’s less than enthusiastic reaction led to the formation of so-called self-declared republics fighting the central Ukrainian forces. These outposts were leavened by hard-bitten Russian soldiers and military supplies by Moscow. President Putin had, meanwhile, fortified his flank by absorbing the Crimean Peninsula, once a part of the Soviet Union and home to the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Most of its inhabitants are as Russian as they come.
The downing of a Malaysian Airways’ passenger plane over eastern Ukraine leading to hundreds of deaths by suspected Russian-supported and supplied rebels created the political climate for punishing Russia, setting off an increasingly serious sets of sanctions.The European Union led by Germany is now on board although not all members are equally enthusiastic about the consequent losses they are suffering through loss of their exports and the counter-sanctions Moscow has imposed, largely on fruits and vegetables and meat.
As with any snowballing quarrel, the sanctions take on a character of their own and tend to cloud the chances of a compromise settlement. It has to be recognised that the world is not in the old Yeltsin era, with Moscow eating out of the crumbs offered by the West after the climactic break-up of the Soviet Union. Whatever adjectives the West uses in describing the Russian President, he will continue to fight for his country’s interests as he sees them.
For President Putin and Russia, Ukraine is the thin end of the wedge which will determine its future standing as a nation of consequence. The irony, of course, is that everyone knows the solution to the problem for Ukraine’s, Russia’s and Europe’s future peace and prosperity. It is to retain it as a neutral state, friendly to both the West and Russia outside the domain of Nato.
Many factors impinge on such an outcome in the near term. Despite the end of the Cold War, there is no shortage of cold warriors in the corridors of power in the United States and Europe. Germany, a key country in Europe, and its Chancellor Angela Merkel have convinced themselves that despite loss of hefty German exports, Moscow should be taught a lesson. Technically and legally, Russia has contravened the post-World War II order by formally annexing Crimea thereby changing national boundaries.
More sober voices are now emerging in the West on drawing a line in the sand and thinking of the future. As is well known, western Europe is dependent on supplies of Russian gas and oil, a loss that will be acutely felt in the approaching winter. At present, games are being played on how to let in Russian humanitarian aid massed in an impressive convoy of massive military vehicles painted white. They are meant for the besieged towns in eastern Ukraine, but the Kiev government fears that the aid might as well be a camouflage for fresh military supplies to the rebels. Tentatively, a deal is reported to have been reached on inspecting the contents of the aid convoy.
There are new US warnings to Moscow with the implied threat of further sanctions, with Moscow not fully revealing its hand apart from reiterating its benign intent. One problem, of course, is the lack of trust between the two sides. The Kiev leadership, as the new converts to the virtues of the European Union, takes maximalist positions leaving it to the main sponsors in the West to do the heavy lifting.
Germany has emerged as the major player because it was until recently the most enthusiastic in seeking closer trade and political relations with Russia. Chancellor Merkel seems to have convinced her country’s business that their loss of exports is for the collective good. Leaders of the ruling party have begun defining Russians as unpredictable, a cardinal sin in the German lexicon.
While the decibel level of the rhetoric on Ukraine on the two sides shows no sign of abating, there are quiet moves on the sides to move towards a resolution. It is not difficult to reconcile President Putin’s minimum demands with Western interests. If Ukraine can live in peace by being friendly to both the European Union and its immediate vast neighbour, it would bring stability to the region.
For the United States, smoking the peace pipe with Russia would have the great advantage of resolving larger issues of war and peace that are threatening the very existence of the nation states of West Asia.
